Sony Alpha 7 Review

Image Quality

Distortion correction

The a7 has a distortion correction feature for use with E-mount lenses. Whether correction is applied depends on the lens. For the 28-70mm and 55mm FE lenses it's active, while it's off for the 35mm.

Below are examples of the distortion correction feature in action, first for the 28-70mm kit zoom. The corrected versions are straight-out-of-the-camera JPEGs, while the Raws were processed with ACR 8.3 with lens distortion correct turned off.

28mm - corr. off

28mm - corr. on

70mm - corr. off

70mm - corr. on

The 28-70mm kit lens has plenty of both barrel and pincushion distortion, which the correction feature dramatically reduces, without a significant hit in image quality. Up next, the 55mm prime:

55mm - corr. off

55mm - corr. on

The 55mm F1.8 prime needs a lot less correction than the 28-70, and again, the distortion correction feature does its job, with no ill effects.

Neither of these is necessarily problematic (it's not unusual for mirrorless lenses to be designed with correction as part of the concept), but the high price of the Sony lenses, combined with the differing results achieved by shooting in JPEG (where the correction cannot be turned-off), and Raw, where the correction parameters don't appear to be available to third-party converters, isn't ideal.

Rough edges

The Sony a7 (and a7R) use a content-sensitive noise reduction system that attempts to protect areas of fine detail while applying higher levels of noise reduction to smooth, featureless areas. The results are mixed.

On the plus side, the JPEG has done a good job of preserving detail in the face, while smoothing the beige wall to the left. Our processed Raw file uses the same noise reduction over the entire image, meaning a balance has to be struck between smoothing the background and retaining detail. As such, our chosen settings, while appearing to retain more detail, have neither the well-defined edges or smooth background of the camera's JPEG.

Where the context-sensitive approach falls down is at transitions between areas it concludes to be smooth and those it considers detailed - leaving a pronounced 'halo' of noise at the edge of smooth regions. This, combined with the camera's tendency to sharpen edges, can leave a rather unpleasant result if you zoom in. Our test scene suggests the problem becomes visible around ISO 12,800.

We printed the central 19 x 13" of a similar image to the one shown above (such that the whole image would have been 30 x 20") and, although the effect was clearly visible, and the radical difference in noise levels across the image is slightly unusual, the results were pretty usable.

Heavy-handed noise suppression

Overall, the noise suppression is too aggressive in the JPEGs, making particularly the a7 images seem artificial at times. Naturally this can be turned down, but the default settings look way too much like a brush stroke filter has been applied. This gets worse as ISO rises.

100% crop - Camera JPEG

ISO 640, F7.1, 1/250, 53mm w/28-70mm

100% crop - ACR conversion

The birds in the above ISO 640 image look plastic, and the grass looks like a poor paint job, with very little definition. It's the opposite of what we'd expect from a 24.3MP camera, while the Raw looks noticeably better.

Overall image quality

Despite this two-page Image Quality section being full of little complaints, we were actually generally pretty impressed with the a7's image quality - particularly if you shoot Raw. The JPEGs are rather over-processed and prone to exhibit some or all of the above flaws and limitations, depending on the subject matter. Overall, they're not terrible, but we're disappointed to see such potentially limited and limiting files from a camera at this price.

In addition, despite having an anti-aliasing filter, the a7 can occasionally exhibit moiré, but it's something we only saw once or twice in the hundreds of images we shot.

One of the advantages of a full frame sensor is that its large surface area means it has the chance to receive more light, at any given set of exposure settings, than a smaller sensor. As expected, the Sony a7 performed well in low light (with the caveats we've already mentioned). Image quality from the a7 was very good in low light when detail was high, making shooting as high as ISO 6400 an easy choice.

Sony a7 ISO 2500, F5.6, 1/80, -1EV 28-70mm lens @69mm

Whether the degree of Raw compression concerns you is a decision for you to make for yourself. From a philosophical perspective, we're not at all happy to see this approach being taken in a camera at this level (and that becomes an even bigger concern in the a7R). As it is, the real-world impact is likely to be small, and will only have any effect from time-to-time. We're not sure buyers should have to tolerate that extra uncertainty from what is likely to be the camera they turn to for optimal results.

Raw files for download

Below are a few Raw images that you can download and tweak to your heart's content:

Comments

i want to upgrade my 60D... i have couple of cheap canon lenses including canon 55-250 stm, sigma 30 1.4 and sigma 17-50 2.8.i want to upgrade my body to 80D but i wondering should i screw everything and buy sony A7. at my place A7 is cheaper than 80D (A7 is 900usd - 80D is 1KUSD)for sure have to buy couple of lenses for sony. my budget is max 1500 USD

Dreadful camera, auto focus is useless, colors aren't even as good as an old Canon Rebel 300D. Only buy it if you want to go manual focus or your shooting targets are static otherwise forget it 70% of the shots will be out of focus. if you plan to take pictures of children forget it :)

The biggest lie i've ever read here on DPR - i do own the A7, and colors aren't worse then a 2003 way cheap APS-C Beginners Canon DSLR. AF also improved with newer Firmware, but it isn't a sports camera. But it's very good for adapting old, manual focus glass, virtually every lens from the past 50-80 years can be used with focus peaking & a matching, cheap adapter - and works quite well. Horses for courses.

I think that comment from mlupi must relate to the A7R, not the A7. Having had both, the A7R is extremely slow on focusing and yes, I missed a load of shots or got them out of focus. (portrait and baby photography). The A7R is aimed at landscape photographers, so yes, it is aimed at static subjects! As for the A7, the focus is very fast, precise and reliable. Colours are accurate. They may have the same body, but they are two very different cameras when it comes to performance.

There is a setting that can either reflect the exposure setting or this can be turned off to maintain constant brightness. In other words, if you shoot in Manual mode with fixed iso and settings effect ON, your brightness will reflect the settings i.e. EVF will get darker as you close down aperture. With settings effect OFF the EVF will maintain constant brightness but framerate may get lower as you let less light in. Settings effect OFF is especially useful when flash is used in manual mode or when you want to maintain constant brightness to aid the visibility, especially when focusing manually.

Hi Vit, thanks for the help. I would be most interested in depth of field effects when stopping down. Clearly this would show no mater what, but I thought the digital display ought to show a bright screen so long as there was enough ambient light, and so it apparently does I also don't understand why manual focus should be difficult although I suppose without the split image finders it might not be as obvious. some of us started out with no rangefinders - had to guess distance.

this is a very thorough review. the trick is to decide whether the things the reviewer was troubled by would be a problem to me. i think things which bother reviewers particularly in the human interface are things which an owner gets used to particularly nutty software menus. i have a car and a tv with menus which never could have been actually used by the folks who devised them, but now that I know them i can sort of ignore their illogic.

Have had the 7 for about a year now and love it...picked it up for $999

No camera is perfect...but the image quality is much better than my A99 (Old Main, that is my backup now) and the A850 (Old Backup camera).-Though I do us the A850 when I want some softer pictures

The High ISO (1600 or higher) Image Quality is really helping me out in many different situations:-Bouncing flash into umbrella instead of my huge portable flashes-Low light when I cannot use flash-Flash indoors party and picking up background light

I am sure I will upgrade my camera in another 3 years or so, but I am in no rush with having the A7, A99 and the A850-Weddings, Portraits and parties (90% of the time)

There has been a firmware update 1.02 of whch one of its features was to improve the application of noise reduction to jpgs. It made changes to the high ISO suppression. Still no update to 14bit RAW yet as the version II cameras have had but we can hope.Overall I have found the camera on V2.00 firmware to be responsive, quick to start up and focus and only a littel behind my Nikon D610 in its high ISO performance in jpg and RAW - maybe 1/2 a stop at most. Switching off Auto Dynamic Range helped with reducing shadow noise.

Thank you GlenI've recently bought an A7 with the original firmware. I didn't fully test it before updating to the v2.00. I noticed a quite improvement in the start up time and responsiveness but couldn't compare the IQ before and after. All in all , I'm happy with it.

hi guysI have sony a7 and i have been using canon mount on it with all sorts of lenses but one particular one which is Tamron 18-270 Di II VC LD is acting strange.it has 2-4 circles not just in viwfinder but even on a photo and it get worse when underexposed

This is a very old question, but in case you haven't got the answer it is quite simple: The 18-270mm is a lens designed for a smaller sensor (APS-C) and it's image circle does not cover the full frame sensor. What you are seeing is a lack of coverage, this can be avoided by either using it in crop mode (the lenses intended format) or using a FF lens instead.

You guys are kidding right? I don't like Sony but I'm not so blind to say they are a weak company. They produce pretty much every piece of electronics you can think of. Wake up people, Sony is here to stay.

After a decade of losing money on TVs, and four consecutive net loss-making years, Sony is running out of time and money. I won't buy camera from a company that might not exist anymore soon in the near future.

hiId like to know something about sony A7 I hear so many great comments and how great this camera is.

i just got one and I have some concerns regarding live view and viewfinder

When taking pictures, the image through the viewfinder or lcd screen is fuzzy/grainy. Especially in darker environments. It's not as bad in bright light conditions. The pictures themselves are perfect and exactly what you'd expect even when viewed on the lcd screen of the camera

could yo tell me if this is on all sony cameras or just A7 could it be coz of lens or do i have to change my settings

yea its not your camera. i had a sony a58 and the images looked grainy from the viewfinder, as soon as i would take a picture and it would review it was buttery smooth and clear. i think it is because of the lower res screen? i could be wrong but its normal :)

thank you for your reply.thought that Sony a7 is going to be sharp,pin sharp as i have seen so many reviews but seems like you really need just one of the 5 lenses from Zeiss FE lenswhat a shame as its nice camera

not exactly there are nice sharp lenses out there which may not beat the zeiss but in terms of price to quality ratio sure does. i have bought the a6000 with kit+55-210 zoom but the lenses i want to add to my collection is either 50mm 1.4 minolta or canon fd, sony 50mm 1.8 so i have a steady and automatic lens for moments i cant fiddle with mf. and samyang/rokinon wideangle lens. that for me would complete the set for a lot of creative photo/video shooting. you dont necessarily have to shell out thousands for pin sharp image.

I have a NEX-7 and was considering upgrading to the A7. After reading this review I have second thoughts. It's definitely a step up but the improvement in IQ is not as much as I expected, given the significantly larger sensor size.

built quality term is just a mess in the internet reviews. If something built in metal, it's built is great, if plastic then so so...this is a big bs...From my own lessons learnt, do not take all these comments in the net so serious.

I've been shooting with nex for two years and started wonder how fuji x systhem is, due to a lot of reviews with huge praises...bought xf35 F1.4, 23 F1.4, xf1024 and two x-a1...for example, sel35 from Sony, outer areas are plastic, bayonet is metal whereas xf35 F1.4 is built all metal, and reviews says great built quality...Let me tell you, two years of sel35 usage, 0 dust spec in the lens, but after two weeks of very careful usage with xf35, there are a lot of dust specks in the lens, on the rear element that can not be cleaned without disassembling the lens. So, very slow and noisy focus system of Xf35 whereas sel35 is light years faster and almost zero noise...Also, xf35 has non internal focusing system, all the fron element moves front and back, moving parts that can be easily damaged if you drop it..So where's the praised built quality?

So another very praised lens, XF1024, reviews says awesome, terrific, outstanding sharpness, built quality bla bla bla...Bought it, used it two weeks and shocked to see how cheaper, twice lighter SEL1018 produces sharper, greater photos....In the net, SEL1018 is a good but not great lens, whereas XF1024 is an outstanding Fuji...That's another BS...SEL1018 is definitely producing sharper images across the frame, in the center, a lot better...and none of these overpriced fujis has no weahter sealind, dust sealing etc...so where and what's the built quality?

dpreview should test A7 again with 1.02 firmware. Amazing jpeg quality now + starp up times are fast now. I can`t understand bad build quality and ergonomics issues at all. Totally amazing camera. Ony WI-FI sucks, playmemories transfer is Super slow .. I just says "preparing for tranfer for 5-10 minutes bofre transfer starts. I think this is more play memories issue than sony a7 issue. So I put airplane mode on, batteries will last longer too.

Build quality today need be just good enough to enable the camera to last its likely useful life - which is at best 3-5 years. My Canon F1 is much better built, as is my Leica M4P.

Could the A7 be more robust? - yes - but why? We see no complaints that it is falling apart under even tough use. No D600 type recalls. I recall when the Canon T90 was introduced in plastic - horror! from the brass/machined metal crowd when introduced in 1986. They're still in use today.

For a camera likely to be obsolescent within a decade, it's built very well. It will last far longer than most complainers will care to own it.

Whether you can turn off the correction depends on which lens you mount - some of the lenses are designed with the correction as part of their design, so you can't turn off the corrections for those (the menu option is ghosted-out when they're mounted).

Since eyesight progressily failing, and ears incresing in acuteness, if i record at 60p, is audio of higher quality tan recording 30p? Often times the sound is more powerful of ear than eye. No reson to use up card space if mainly for audio

No, the audio and video are not tied like that. You change the settings for each separately, I haven't read the full specs on the A7 but I don't think it allows you to change much about how it records audio. If you switch to 60FPS the audio stays the same only the video is encoded differently at the end.

SEL2870 Lens a kit lens said to be of low quality, WELL NOT so!1. take the dam Sony hood off.2. get a 55mm rubber collapsible sunshade3. Put a 55mm Polarizer filter on, any will do.4. Screw the sunshade into it , so you can rotate for polarization max effect5. Use DMF 7x fine focus, in auto or P modes6. Results will astound you at 24x playback magnify! why, the cameras AF system is contrast on A7r based and Passive on A7. Contrast increases through a polarizer, so the AF system is faster and sharper.Will DMF mode fine tuning focus, the results are amazing. Its not the lens folks, its the poor skills of the photographer.Regards, Don@Eastwestphoto

I'm sorry but I strongly disagree, I know the AF is to blame sometimes for a lens's lack of sharpness. So I tried it manually focused which is a breeze on the A7 thanks to the peaking. This lens is cruddy and soft, end of story.

Plus I don't want to bloody DIY a focus filter in order for a lens to perform properly, that's just plain shoddy. I want to spend more time taking pictures and less time twiddling a polarizer.

I'm Sorry, but I strongly disagree to you Carl. My sony 28-70 is pretty awesome for sharpness, its just that, it requires right light to be sharp enough. I have done some outdoor shooting with this lens, and have received some real sharp images and pretty ok sort of bokeh, well I never expected to have any bokeh from this lens in the first place. You must learn, how to use your camera and lenses first, before speaking about it.

Aridom, I agree. I found myself shooting with my kit lens a lot last week when I was walking around with my daughter and 10-month-old grandson. I was shooting in restaurants and stores as well as backyards in shade, on playgrounds etc. It is not quite as sharp as my great legacy primes - but shockingly close, given its price.

DxO doesn't get it always right, but they did on the 28-70, even though they mounted it on the not-recommended-by-Sony A7r. It's a vastly better lens than its critics claim, and as DxO noted, arguably a vastly better buy than the 24-70 pseudo-Zeiss.

I am alternating between my old Hexanon AR 50mm legacy prime lens and the Sony 28-70 kit lens. Love the perfect IQ delivered by the Hexanon (takes me back 38 years!) and love the convenience of the zoom and autofocus of the kit lens, not to mention the IQ which is fantastic.

I have been looking for a full format camera with a tiltable screen that's in my budget for a long time as tripods don't come up to my eye line. I was hoping this to be it but although the spec sheet says RAW is uncompressed format the conclusion says RAW is compressed and lossy. I'm not sure I like lossy RAW files in case one needs or wants to re edit them etc. Could this be Sony's way of helping to differentiate between this and their other more expensive cameras. I wonder if the A7R does the same.

Need some serious advice....mostly blind, but still shoot 4x5 of wilderness landscapes,. For many reasons, down to a7 or a7r to pack in with 4x5 for extended exposures/night/quick macro,/60p video....would prefer a mid range zoom a,d one prime. Since the kit 28-70 relatively small in relation to other FF zooms, how poor or good is its IQ? Would a better aps-c zoom on a6000 have just as good print quality as 28-70 on a7?

I agree, Marc. People have gushed all over the 24-70 because it costs 3-4x the kit lens, but still needs to be stopped down and limited to a 30-60mm range to perceptibly demonstrate superiority to the kit lens.

The kit has a plastic mount, which makes it lighter and probably more rugged than the metal 24-70, too

I have a 24mm Canon FDn f2 that - wide open - blows the doors off any 24-70 at 24mm at any aperture.

Marc and mel, thanks. An additional question...if one use identical lenses, even most highly rated prime, on both A7 and A7R, could the difference in IQ be obvious to human eye...who else...in 24X36 print, viewed at approx. 12" away?Exposures made only on sturdy tripod, approx.1/15th second, ISO 100f16.

No, the difference is not likely to be visible without serious cropping. I have two 24x36 prints from my A7 and my Nikkor 70-210mm f4/f5.6 AF zoom from the 1990s, and they are razor sharp and noise-free at normal viewing distance (3-4 feet - and "abnormal" 1 foot, too ;-)

Ok, regarding the posterization...I've downloaded the arw and the uncompressed nef (page 13 of the review, bottom) and put them in lr 5.3. At each file there is a loading time where you can see the posterization effect in both. After loading there is no posterization. Pushed them to +3.8 ev and there is no posterisation in eiter. So, my opinion is that dpreview was using an older lr.

P.S. I use a calibrated Dell Ultrasharp U2413P.S. Nikon is cleaner in the shadow area on the right but again, a +3 or +3.8 ev is kinda extreme for any raw file imo!

Just wonder if anybody has raised this elsewhere. I am needing FF for DSLR partly because existing lenses are designed for FF. If an entirely new camera system is developed like the A7/A7R, is it correct to say that FF should not be a limit to the max sensor size? Just my stupid idea.

FF is not the limit to max sensor size, they make larger sensors such as medium format. Specialized applications can use sensors much larger but there's no practicality in putting something like that in a DSLR, plus more people (not photographers) are concerned with Mega Pixels not sensor size.

Because the issue your link is talking about is completely pointless. Absolutely doesn't effect the usage of the camera. Here how you can meter the exposure yourself, if the screen is pitch black you are way under exposed. Of it is completely white, you are way over exposed.

Not for street shooting or any fast moving situation. Focusing is horrid to non-existent if you want to capture the moment. After spending two weeks street shooting for the most part - all things considered you need to be on a tripod or to have lots of time to focus first. So forget capturing a "moment" that is fleeting. There are still many features that are just plain wrongly done or not thought thru from the standpoint of real world usage. I've had the NEX 5 and NEX 7. The a7 is better from many standpoints but still lacks the focusing capability of even a low end DSLR. Very disappointed. Sony just can't get this line of cameras up to professional standards yet. Too bad. Would love to see them really make a full-frame mirrorless light weight camera be worth the money. But then their lens choices are just weird. What is the world are they thinking. I don't want to put a 2 pound lens on this camera. That totally defeats the go lighter mantra.

Went street shooting with a group last night with the kit lens. It was fantastic. Yep, with the kit lens! I did not use a tripod. Focusing was dead easy (if you know what you're doing).If the kit lens can perform as well it did at night, then I have no worries at all about what the FE 35mm can do.

I always wonder what kind of seriously weird lighting people must be shooting under when they complain the A7 is slow to focus. Sure, it's not D4 fast but it is not miss-your-shot slow either. It's far better than any of the previous NEXes, and practically instant in daylight.

I didn't know my zeiss 35mm was 2 pounds. Certainly doesn't feel like it. I think Charles comments are just wildly exaggerated. I was taking pics of my daughters on swings yesterday and it tracked them fine. I don't see any difference from my nex6 and my a7 when it comes to focusing.

Briefly tried hands-on in Sony store. I Liked the compact size and light weight, still being a FF. Overall spec is worth drooling over... but I was a bit disappointed that it didn't feel that durable. Maybe I am spoiled by K-5II...

Loving the reviews and specs. My only concern is the focus hunting... I'd love to be able to shoot selfie-interviews without worrying about this problem. Has anyone crafted an electronic focus limiter for these cameras? Even if it's a really binary, crude setup like the old school lenses with a switch? <20 feet, >20 feet? Wouldn't this help a lot?

I've had the A7 since January. I was getting tired of lugging my DSLRs around and wanted a compact ILC, but I wanted full-frame and the ability to change lenses. I finally popped for the A7 and I love it! It's going to be my new wedding, portraiture and fine-art camera. Looking forward to getting the battery grip and some fast Zeiss glass for it in the future. This cameral fills the bill for me. Light, compact and full frame. I think it's the future of cameras.

All of the exposure modes (P/S/A) are broken with Auto ISO and even program shift doesn't work. When for example dialing a larger aperture, the camera will only increase shutter speed, it will not reduce ISO.

Shutter speed priority sticks to f/4, even with the 55/18!

Aperture priority will raise the ISO all the way to the maximum before lowering shutter speed under 1/60 with any lens or focal length!

Sony needs to fix this ASAP with a firmware update! I have this working perfectly with every other camera (even my compact cameras RX100 and Canon S95 can do this perfectly right, not to mention all my DSLRs). I don't expect to see this sort of cock ups on a camera of this level. AutoISO is one of the very best features of modern digital cameras, but somehow Sony was able to mess it up here, even though they get it right for compacts.

I'm glad your having fun, but it doesn't change the fact that Auto ISO on this camera doesn't work at all as it should. I have six other cameras with a fully working AutoISO (in fact I haven't seen a camera in years with this crappy AutoISO). But for some reason Sony messed it up here, even though they got it right with RX100 and RX100II. When I pay 2000€ for a camera (and almost another 2000€ on lenses), I expect a simple feature like this to work.

I think Sony should allow allow the user to set the min. And Max settings for aperture and shutter speed during these auto modes. Them trying to predict what people want doesn't work. Most people think the 1/60 shutter speed is too slow and allows for camera shake, your the first comment I have seen seen that wants it slower. There anything wrong with that it just shows that we all have different needs. I think must people would want max aperture speed to match the lens attached. So a firmware update where people can customize these settings would be great. For now if I want the max aperture I shoot in manual mode or aperture priority mode.

I am considering purchasing my first full frame camera and like what the A7 kit has to offer in size, Raw photos, HD videos, Wifi and price. I am however concerned about the reviewers comments about the disappointment in JPEG photo quality. In looking at the sample JPEG photos illustrated, as an armature photographer, they look very good to me (compared to what I am used to). Would appreciate feedback from current A7 owners on their experience with JPEG quality.

I have had my a7 since the beginning of December. I shoot in both Jpg and raw. I shoot jpg day to day of my kids, family, and casual stuff. I got tired of always shooting raw and having to process photos that I was just gonna share on Facebook or with family and friends. So I shoot raw for paid work or shots that are really important to me. That all. Being said, the Jpgs out of the camera work great and look nice. Dpreview comments on the jpg output was mostly regarding the higher iso noise reduction. If you reduce the in camera noise reduction you will get a much better Jpg at higher iso settings. So far I have zero issues with the Jpg output on my a7 although raw is gonna get you better results as usual.

I should also mention the following about the as well: the camera is really versatile. It being so small and having the nfc feature can take the camera anywhere without it be in convenient and instantly share photos from it with my phone. So I get take the types of shots I get with a high end camera and share them like I shot them with a smart phone. It's really the first ff camera that is practical for everyday use.

Thanks for the great feedback Paul and Quezra. Wow what detail and knowledge! You sold me on the A7. Now my only decision will be whether to purchase the kit 28-70 lens or the Zeiss 24-70. Appears I would be getting a $200 break going with the kit lens however I read the Ziess would provide better image quality and stabilization. In your view, for $900 additional cost going to the Zeiss 24-70 am I really going to notice that much difference, as an amature photographer? Or would I be wiser to start with the kit zoom lens and add other Zeiss lenses at a later time?

I would go with one of the primes actually. Go with the 35mm if want to keep it compact and go with the 55mm if you want the best in image quality. The 55mm was rated the second best lens DXO labs has ever tested. Both lenses are great on the A7. If you must have a zoom I would just stick with the kit lens and buy one of these primes to compliment it.

thanks very much for the additional information on jpegs. as an amateur trying to get into photography this level of detail really helps to make decisions on the purchase and im sold on this Sony right now.

Not a big deal. Note the final thought...most impt of all..."This camera system is not for the weak at heart. It’s a little like using a medium or large format system – you have to do a little work to get spectacular results. The FE 35mm f/2.8 is a costly optic, and throws some obstacles in your path. At the same time, it’s astoundingly sharp and the images really do pop and sizzle. It’s got a wonderful, emotional, and interesting look. Is it right for you?"

Sorry to say it, but I have not experienced ANY issues like these and I have shot hundreds of frames. I never shoot JPEG's so cannot comment on those. Be aware that mounting Legacy Lenses by means of Adapters can give rise to issues such as Colour Shift. This is very well documented, especially with Leica lenses and is nothing new. The problem can be circumvented with a bit of software called CornerFix, see:

If you are not an experienced Photographer you would do well to stay out of this application. Unfortunately, Leica lenses are some of the best optically and if you already own some of these, you will want to crack the issues. Similar problems occur when Leica Glass is adapted to the Sony NEX7. If you are worried, stick to the Sony FE Range of lenses or use one of the Sony A-Mount Range of lenses plus the LA-E4 A-mount adapter.

It was shot as a Single RAW Frame with Conversion using Sony's FOC Image Data Processor software and saved as a 16-Bit TIFF File in the sRGB Colour Space. Further processing was performed and a B&W Conversion made. Once you have opened the image on Flickr you will see three White Blobs in the bottom right of the Lightbox view. Single Right Click on this and then on "View all sizes" and open the image as the Original Size i.e. at 2000 Pixels in its widest dimension. The detail resolved and the Dynamic Range are very good for a Single Frame capture.

Having read this review, I thought that I might share some images and thoughts about this new Sony Camera System. I already own the Sony ILCE-7R with a Sonnar T* FE35mm f/2.8 ZA lens and have nearly two months experience with the System. While it is NOT the Alpha 7, it will be similar, You will find my Set on Flickr at:

There are 29 images in the Set, all "Real World" images NOT Test Charts or Brick Walls. All have been shot using Available Light and the majority from a Manfrotto Carbon Fibre tripod as this is the way I work.

The problem of sensor reflections mentioned by Just a Photographer below has been reported by many others too and appears to be a real problem with no likely fix in sight (unless Sony is offering free return and modification of the A7 sensor´s cover glass). As the reflections occurr not only in night shots but also when shooting against the sun, they are a real concern and far more common than the infamous Fuji orbs which were difficult to obtsain even when trying hard (and have finally been fixed for that matter). A deal breaker for this otherwise great camera! What a pitty ...

A very exaggerated problem of a very specific type of photo (star bursts), and common to a lot more mirrorless cameras than the A7. Sony will probably happily tell you: Stick to shooting native lenses, and don't stop down so much.

The problem also occurs at large apertures, albeit to a lesser extent. So, shooting with the lens wide open is no remedy. There is no easy or universal fix. By the way, the same reflections also occur with native FE lenses (1.8 50 and 2.8 35) to the same extent as with (almost all) adapted lenses.

Sure, other cameras may show similar artefacts under similar conditions, but with one exception (Fuji "orbs"), to a lesser extent and by far not as obtrusive and "ugly" as with the A7.

It is a major problem which Sony has to address in order not to loose credibility and trust.

"lose credibility and trust"? Over an issue 99% of users are unlikely to ever encounter or not even notice? I think you're exaggerating a smidgen. I bet most people don't even know what star bursts are. Meanwhile, Fuji's orb problem is a great example of how little impact that issue had in the 'credibility' and 'trust' of the brand - almost zilch.

"Fuji's orb problem is a great example of how little impact that issue had in the 'credibility' and 'trust' of the brand" - That's only because Fuji admitted the problem, handled it in an obliging, accommodating way and finally fixed it and everybody was content. Fuji listened to customers, heeded their complaints and did not leave them standing in the rain ...

The problem is that if you follow the link and read how the problem manifests, it is almost (but not entirely) absent with native lenses, but very pronounced with film-era lenses. Sony will most likely write it down as within their bounds of tolerance for the native lenses because well, pretty much every mirrorless camera gets these (you need to read all the pages of J.A.P.'s link, not in a selective way, if you want an objective perspective). Now I'm sorry but I've never heard of a company worry about problems you encounter when you adapt third party lenses on to their camera. And native lenses don't have this issue in anyway close to as significant. I've shot some stars myself with the 55/1.8 - not because I do it but just to see it for myself - TOTALLY OVERBLOWN NON-ISSUE is my conclusion.

One of the (if not THE) major selling point(s) of the A7 is its ability to adapt almost any lens. Most who buy it at this stage will buy it to shoot legacy 35 mm lenses at their native AOV. Who will buy a camera with only 3 native mount lenses available? Those who want to shoot Sony / Zeiss FE lenses will wait for a year to see how the lens line develops and then buy the A7/A7R's successor - (hopefully) minus the teething troubles of the current models.

It's pretty simple, If your gonna be shooting a lot third party lenses and will be shooting a lot of night scenes with small apertures then you need to know that this is an issue you will run into. If you own the camera or choose to buy it this is just a limitation you workaround when shooting. It is always good to know your cameras limitations, they all have them. I have had my a7 since the day they came out and haven't ran into the issue yet with with lot of hand held night shooting, which means wider aperture settings. I'm gonna see if I can purposely male it happen now that I am aware of the issue.

@quezra. I have not the slightest idea whether this problem is HUGE or small. But one thing I do know, and that is that I surely would not buy this camera if it works badly on "film era lenses". For me. its only big selling point is that it is a FF camera that can take my old lenses. So ... I really want to know the extent of this problem.

In these comparisons, you have not included the D5200 (which is not quite the same as the 3200) or the Sony Alpha Nex 7. Very relevant, because the Nex 7 jpegs looked really beautiful up through 3200 compared to nearly all the other aps-c cameras and is an important head to head comparison for those considering an upgrade; and the D5200 is actually the highest scoring APS-C of any kind on the DXOMark camera sensor score.(84 vs 83 for the D7100). That makes it especially important given astonishing new APS-c capabilities using the new Sigma 18-35. Do you think you can include them?

Photoshop. GoPro. Every once in a while a product emerges that defines a category. And sometimes, it vanishes just as quickly as it arrived on the scene. This week's Throwback Thursday remembers the Flip, the pocket camcorder everyone had – until they didn't.

After a popular Facebook teaser and some studio portrait samples, Godox has finally officially released the Godox A1 smartphone flash and flash trigger. Cheap, versatile and innovative, color us intrigued.

Canon’s EOS 5D Mk IV has won the European Imaging and Sound Association’s Professional DSLR of the Year award, making this the third year in a row that the brand has beaten Nikon to the top spot in the professional camera category.

Edward Weston was one of the most influential photographers of the 20th century, and in this episode of Advancing Your Photography we learn the extreme technique he used to capture one of his most famous still life photos.

Venus Optics has announced the price and delivery date of the second lens to join its Zero-D line up: the 15mm F2 for Sony’s E mount. A lens they've dubbed, "the world's fastest 15mm rectilinear lens for full-frame."

The Canon EF 35mm F2 IS USM is an understated jewel of a lens, and one that we've enjoyed on a variety of cameras since its release almost five years ago. Its relatively small size and image stabilization make it a versatile tool for a variety of photography - check out our sample gallery.

You don't need a fancy studio or tons of gear to capture the kind of classic product photography you see in magazines. In this video, Dustin Dolby shows you how to do it with just a couple of speedlights and some know-how.

The Minolta MC Rokkor-X 40-80mm F2.8 is unlike any zoom lens you've probably ever seen. Instead of a helicoid, it uses a gearbox, and because of this it's still one of the sharpest zoom lenses out there.

If you're looking to switch to Sony, the company's new limited-time "α trade up" promotion can snag you up to $500 + trade-in value towards a brand new a9, a7 II, a7R II, or a7S II when you hand over your DSLR or mirrorless camera.

The Google Camera app exclusive to the company's own Pixel phone has been unofficially ported to other Android devices. If you're willing to take the risk of installing, you can now use features like HDR+ on the Galaxy S8, LG G6, OnePlus 5, and more.